Jumbucks Lexicon Wiki
This Page is OOC (quoted from http://www.20by20room.com/2003/11/lexicon_an_rpg.html ) Here's a little roleplaying game that I've been toying with. I call it the Lexicon rpg, in honor of its inspiration, Milorad Pavic's Dictionary of the Khazars. The basic idea is that each player takes on the role of a scholar, from before scholarly pursuits became professionalized (or possibly after they ceased to be). You are cranky, opinionated, prejudiced and eccentric. You are also collaborating with a number of your peers -- the other players -- on the construction of an encyclopedia describing some historical period (possibly of a fantastic world). The game is played in 26 turns, one for each letter of the alphabet. 1. On the first turn, each player writes an entry for the letter 'A'. You come up with the name of the entry, and you write 100-200 words on the subject. At the end of the article, you sign your name, and make two citations to other entries in the encyclopedia. These citations will be phantoms -- their names exist, but their content will get filled in only on the appropriate turn. No letter can have more entries than the number of players, either, so all citations made on the first turn have to start with non-A letters. 2. On the second and subsequent turns, you continue to write entries for B, C, D and so on. However, you need to make three citations. One must be a reference to an already-written entry, and two must be to unwritten entries. (On the 25th and 26th turns, you only need to cite one and zero phantom entries, respectively, because there won't be enough phantom entries, otherwise.) It's an academic sin to cite yourself, you can never cite an entry you've written. (OOC, this forces the players to intertwingle their entries, so that everybody depends on everyone else's facts.) Incidentally, once you run out of empty slots, obviously you can only cite the phantom slots. 3. Despite the fact that your peers are self-important, narrow-minded dunderheads, they are honest scholars. No matter how strained their interpretations are, their facts are accurate as historical research can make them. So if you cite an entry, you have to treat its factual content as true! (Though you can argue vociferously with the interpretation and introduce new facts that shade the interpretation.) 4. This little game will probably play best on a wiki, and it should take a month or so to play to completion. At the end of it, you'll have a highly-hyperlinked document that details a nice little piece of collaborative world-building. The owner of the wiki should set the general subject of the Lexicon. I suggest that he or she make use of the technique of "open reference" when describing the historical period: "You are all revisionist scholars from the Paleotechnic Era arguing about how the Void Ghost Rebellion led to the overthrow of the cyber-gnostic theocracy and the establishment of the Third Republic." What a cyber-gnostic theocracy is, or what happened to the first two republics, or what the Paleotechnic Era is are all unknown -- they are named to specifically to evoke a mood and inspire the other players' creativity. (This is an idea which I've first seen in fully articulated form in the character creation rules for Robin Laws's Hero Wars game.) Topic / Theme / Universe Anyone want to make a suggestion? Rifflesby 00:13, June 17, 2010 (UTC) How about we all (or whoever wants to) submits a one sentence idea and we use one-a those free survey generators to vote on it? (Examples: "The Curious Monsters of the Ulde, and Those Which Hunted Them" or "The Polychromatic Skydoors and their effects on the Laser Rebellion of 1309" or "The war between the Black Jasmine Dynasty and the Tallgods" or "How Steam-Jazz begot the Airship Tea-Pilgrimages"). Alternately we can all just put some here and you pick one, Riff, because you started this awesome madness. We're gonna stray from the topic anyway probably, but something juicy and evocative to get everyone started sounds good. Also, as ya can tell, I likes me stuff bordering on or firmly in the fantastic or sci fi. Andronicus Paulicus 01:48, June 17, 2010 (UTC) Definitely fantastical / sci-fi-ical sounds good, and also I think historical / archaeological (as opposed to current events). Something otherworldly, and we're scholars from that world, or another one, but not this one -- e.g. no comparing Lawrence hla Trass III (Prime Lord Duke of Flamp-by-Updike) to Winston Churchill -- in character, we're not aware of Winston Churchill. (If need be, Talk pages can have a section at the bottom for OOC discussion of that article, but everything else should be IC.) Also I expect it goes without saying that this is gonna end up on the comedic side, just by the nature of who's playing -- but, we should aim toward a drier tone in our humor and avoid outright goofiness. More Look Around You and less Family Guy, if you see what I mean. And no pop-culture references unless they're of the fictional world's pop-culture, and probably not even then -- we are respected scholars, after all! Rifflesby 02:26, June 17, 2010 (UTC) "The Dust Folk: Legends, Artifacts, and Misunderstandings." Gemelli23 03:04, June 17, 2010 (UTC) "The Art of the Twelve Elements: Histories, Mysteries, Masters and Disasters" Crovax1234 08:01, June 17, 2010 (UTC) "Perennial Apocalypse (or) The Phoenix of the Keladran System: The Rise, Fall, Rise, Fall, Rise, and Fall of the People of Keladran IV" --Rifflesby 11:26, June 17, 2010 (UTC) "The Second Palgone Empire: Prosperity Through Chaos" Gdyetrauda 15:02, June 17, 2010 (UTC) "Blinded by the Sun: Relics of the Superterranean World" Dr. Magnifico 23:35, June 17, 2010 (UTC) "No Oil For Blood: The Organic Rights Movement and the Second Man-Machine War" "The Beretti Nebula: Our Unusual Neighbors Beyond the Wormhole" "Nobody Believed Him: The Travels, Tales, And Trials of Harrican Syldanade" "Centrillia III: The Impossible Cultures of an Uninhabitable World" "Hive City Prime: A Compendium For Travellers and Tourists" "Finders Keepers: The Lost Continent of Ylk" --Rifflesby 12:27, June 18, 2010 (UTC) "Machine Rage: The Historical Roots of Our Genetic Technophobia" "The Working Years: Life Before the Shoggoths" "Discombobulation: How Dancing Died" Malaclypse the Elder 16:01, June 18, 2010 (UTC) "Terenzi-by-the-Sea: Mysteries of the World's Most Unusual Tourist Destination" Rifflesby 04:09, June 19, 2010 (UTC) Players Sign here if you're playing. For the sake of this not getting crazy huge, let's keep it on the down-low -- don't invite people you wouldn't invite to the Jumbucks Warcraft guild, basically. Devsters and The Rye and close associates. Rifflesby 00:18, June 17, 2010 (UTC) I'm in for sure. When do we want to come up with the general setting? Crovax1234 00:32, June 17, 2010 (UTC) Count me in. I'm not insane enough these days without completely fabricating truths. Gdyetrauda 00:59, June 17, 2010 (UTC) Me, me, me! Nytmare 00:59, June 17, 2010 (UTC) I am totally all over this. Also, this is Smoove, but if we're being scholars then I am dang well going to use a proper scholarly nom de plume. Andronicus Paulicus 01:24, June 17, 2010 (UTC) Yes, absolutely! Gemelli23 01:29, June 17, 2010 (UTC) Is this where I tell my family where to send the money? Lycrashampoo 10:23, June 17, 2010 (UTC) "Mag" "Magnifico" and "Mr. Magnifico" were all taken.. WTF? So, as befits a scholar, here I shall be . . . Dr. Magnifico 13:39, June 17, 2010 (UTC) It's about time someone organized a reliable source of trustworthy information on the internet! (Baron Mind here.) Malaclypse the Elder 13:38, June 18, 2010 (UTC) Rules (swiped from http://www.gamegrene.com/wiki/Main_Page ) #Scholars shall dib (reserve), and then write, one entry per turn. Turns loop from A to Z back to A. #Entries shall cite two phantom (unwritten) entries and, after the first turn, one existing entry. #Scholars shall neither cite themselves, nor write phantoms they were the first to cite. #After the first turn, all phantoms for a letter shall be written before new entries are created. #Of your required two phantom citations, only one cited phantom can be newly defined. #The required per-turn citations must not be to entries or phantoms created in the current turn. #Rule of A: During turn A, scholars may write new A entries instead of defining an existing A phantom. #Rule of X: If no turn X phantoms remain, you may write a previous letter's phantom instead. Example of Play (first turn) #On the first turn, Sean B. Palmer defines his one entry for the letter A: Andelphracian Lights (Rule 1). #In Andelphracian Lights, he creates two phantoms: Bysted Timperton and Quester and Phorrus (Rule 2). #Sean B. Palmer may never define Bysted Timperton and Quester and Phorrus now. (Rule 3). #On the next turn, all phantoms for the letter B (like Bysted Timperton) must be defined (Rule 4). Example of Play (all other turns) #It's turn 2, letter B, and scholars must first define all phantoms starting with that letter (Rule 4). #Sean B. Palmer wants the Bureau of Forgotten Knowledge and commits an edit saying so (Rule 1). #He checks "What links here" on the Bureau of Forgotten Knowledge page to see what truths, if any, are known. #He also searches for the expression/term in the "search" box to find any unlinked mention of his entry. #He writes the entry, and cites two phantoms (existing or not) and one previously written entry. (Rule 2). #His citations, however, must not be those he's previously created (Rule 3; see Ghyll Index and FAQ). #His citations must also have been created or defined before the current turn of play. (Rule 5). Useful wiki-use links New pages / Page formatting / Linking (And more can be had by scouting around in that vicinity.) List of Articles Latest activity Category:Browse